list_schedule_v3_rotations

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already provide readOnlyHint, idempotentHint, and destructiveHint, so the description is not required to repeat safety traits. It adds no further behavioral context beyond return type, which is minimal. No contradictions with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Extremely concise with two sentences and a clean Args/Returns structure. Front-loaded with the main action. Every word earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple list tool with one parameter and an existing output schema, the description is complete. It adequately describes what the tool does without needing to detail return values.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

With 0% schema description coverage, the description compensates by explaining schedule_id as 'The ID of the v3 schedule', adding meaning beyond the schema's title. For a single required parameter, this is clear and sufficient.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states it lists all rotations for a v3 schedule, using specific verb 'List' and resource 'rotations for a v3 schedule'. It distinguishes from siblings like get_schedule_v3_rotation (single rotation) and list_schedule_v3_rotation_events (events).

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No explicit when-to-use or alternatives are provided. While the purpose is clear, given sibling tools list_schedule_v3_... and get_schedule_v3_rotation, the description lacks guidance on when to prefer this over other similar tools.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.